QLM questions

[Wolfgang]

I've been thinking about Quality Loss Modifier since I returned to the game recently...

When I first started playing Sqb, I used it all the time for all pbm games.

Then I played a series of RV games with Ozgur, where he didn't use it at all.

And now I prefer not to use it for pbm unless the scenario has it as a default.

While I think the concept behind QLM makes total sense, I tend to think that most of the scenarios were developed, tested, and balanced without using QLM. (Am I incorrect here?)

The nature of QLM would mean that it will increase the disparity between two forces - taking players further away from the intended balance of the scenario when it was originally designed.

Also: If QLM is new(?) to squad battles - that would mean some titles were developed and balanced without that as a factor.

Additionally:
I debate this but:
QLM to me seems more appropo for post ww2 conflicts if anything where advances in first aid training, research, & technology have increasingly mitigated casualties compared to what would have been pre-1945


I'd welcome any insight here - it could be I'm missing something here?

[Richie61]

I am kind of new to SB and I thought it should always be used. Correct me here, but doesn't this rule take the unit's morale into account when calculating the casualty count?

When the Quality Loss Modifier optional rule is selected, then the casualty and effectiveness losses suffered by infantry, both Teams and Leaders, is affected by a factor that depends on the quality of the unit:

• Units of Quality A have their losses modified by 0.5.
• Units of Quality B have their losses modified by 0.75.
• Units of Quality C have no change to their losses.
• Units of Quality D have their losses modified by 1.3.
• Units of Quality E have their losses modified by 1.6.

NOTE:
I just noticed this in Ed's read me for FWW.

In SB:FWW, the Quality Loss Modifier and Alternate Fire Density
rules have been disabled, due to the unique size of the units present in this title as opposed to other Squad

[Jeff Conner]

I think you are correct in your assumptions about using QLM in scenarios that were not designed for it; that it may affect the play balance. However, my understanding of the rule is that it does not reflect increases in technology, but that more experienced (and to some extent, better trained) troops are going to make better use of cover, use move and fire techniques not covered in the game, move when they should and not when they shouldn't. The rule tries to simulate this by modifying the casualties based on morale. Since these advantages for elite troops are pretty much timeless, the rule can be used with just about any time period.

I personally like it very much. I think that one of the weaknesses of SB is that it is more of a weapon based simulation rather than a troop quality simulation; one man (or tank crew) is almost as good as any other. This does not seem to be overly historical and I think QLM helps balance that out a bit. Falklands is a pretty good example of what I am talking about. At Goose Green (just one example, there are many others), a single battalion of elite British troops drove back and eventually forced the surrender of a force twice its size. Both sides were somewhat surprised by size of the opposing force. That battle would be difficult to simulate with SB without QLM, and even with it, the British player will be hard pressed to duplicate the historical losses suffered by the British.

That's just my two cents worth on a Sunday afternoon, I yield the pulpit.

Jeff

[Ozgur Budak]

I just found your mail about this issue. Sorry for the late response.
Here is my two cents.
It depends on the scenario's design. Some designers focus on historical accuracy rather than play balance so you have to get help from the system to balance the fight. In those cases using QLM can be a good idea. However some scenarios have already taken troops quality and its effects on play balance into account; such as giving more troops and fire power to the low quality troops. If this is the case "accuracy" has been incorporated into the scenario as oobs, terrain, deployment, objectives etc. and using QLM is not the best option. Generally (not a rule) I play RV QLM unchecked because I tried to tackle with the quality differences in the scenario design.

[TheBigRedOne]

In general, unless told to do otherwise, I always test games with QLM on.

[Volcano Man]

Yes, QLM is a good rule to use by default. The only reason it was disabled in SqB FWW though is, well, because it is sort of a different animal. The differences that QLM models is very good for the small sized squads present in all other SqB titles, but when units represents half platoons then the slaughter is unnecessarily magnified.